If you would investigate the documents of the congressman who nominated Dr. Hammesfahr for the work he has done in these types of patients - you would know.
A Florida State judge reviewed the accusations and evidence and ruled that Dr. Hammesfahr was not guilty of quackery - But - instead praise the work he was doing.
Medicare approved of his methods (they must have done some reviewing of his claims in order to allow him to work with them) - the State of Florida has still not closed him down - They must have reviewed him and allowed him to Continue practicing medicine!
Some people - in spite of evidence - will continue on their opinion -
Here is some information on what was found by the first doctors who examined Terri. It is their observations that make this case so chilling - aparently - Judge Greer overlooked these medical findings in making his decisions about Terri.
Date Source Description
2/25/1990 Terri's Injury
2/25/1990 X-Ray Report Dr. Hameroff
Images taken of cervical spine, no acute bony pathology - straightening of normal cervical lordosis
2/25/1990 Neuro Consult Dr. DeSousa
Deeply comatose. No evidence of acute process in CT scan. Evidence of myoclonic seizures.
Rule out acute myocardiac infarction, seizures as cause.
Neck is somewhat stiff as is all of the muscles of the body. No jugular venous distension.
WBC 26,300, drug screen negative
(To those that say she was using drugs for her "bulimia" -it says that she was clear.
And to those that say she had a heart attack - it says there was NO myocardiac infarction - an interruption in the supply of blood to the heart, usually as a result of occlusion of a coronary artery. An occlusion IS a heart attack!)
(To See the Rest of the Medical Observations by doctors and staff)
http://www.theempirejournal.com/02230551_medical_observations_sh.htm
The doc has no credibility. Sorry.
If you buy this BS, you may have such an injury.
Just for a little more perspective on Dr. H:
http://www.casewatch.org/civil/schiavo.shtml
What is significant, however, and what [undermines] his credability is that he did not present to this court any evidence other than his generalized statements as to the efficacy of his therapy on brain damaged individuals like Terry Schiavo. He testified that he has treated about 50 patients in the same or worse condition than Terry Schiavo since 1994 but he offered no names, no case studies, no videos and no tests results to support his claim that he had success in all but one of them. If his therapy is as effective as he would lead this court to believe, it is inconceivable that he would not produce clinical results of these patients he has treated. And surely the medical literature would be replete with this new, now patented, procedure. Yet, he has only published one article and that was in 1995 involving some 63 patients, 60% of whom were suffering from whiplash. None of these patients were in a persistent vegetative state and all were conversant. Even he acknowledges that he is aware of no article or study that shows vasodilatation therapy to be an effective treatment for persistent vegetative state patients. The court can only assume that such substantiations are not available, not just catalogued in such a way that they can not be readily identified as he testified.